A New Reel to Reel Tape Deck?

french_fries,

I agree!  I see no reason why they can't spool up a 3600' of good back coated tape.  If they did, it would take ONE reel at 15ips to get 45 min of music.  I tape full LP's all the time on ONE reel in 1/2 track format.  Using such a heavy mil and short spool of tape is silly and expensive.

I used to have several 1/4 track tapes that sounded excellent.  There is a difference in sound between 1/4 track and 1/2 track, but in some instances it is soooo very close.  

N.

I hear all this, but as an archiving media, hasn't vinyl well outlasted tape? I have original late 60's early 70's vinyl that is still sounding good. Would a R2R tape have lasted that long without severe degradation? And I'm not talking about temperature controlled vault storage, but you average house/garage storage?

I am sorry to say, but I don't think there will ever be much of a market for tape. Vinyl is a PITA to listen to, tape is 2X the PITA. I had a Tanberg R2R back in the day (not those nice servo controlled ones, but the manual mechanical joystick) and I don't really miss it.

I am finding digital is not all that bad if recorded and played back through class A analog circuitry with no IC opamps. I'm afraid anything produced today by Studer or Revox or Tascam will be chuck full of IC opamps, like most prosumer gear, and will sound like crap, even at 15 ips.

dhl93449, I think you got lost in Audiogon wilderness and chose a wrong thread to paticipate in.
As for archiving, vinyl could and theoretically should be better, though tape will last for decades. And in 200 years all of that will probably be gone, at least outside of climate controlled vaults.

Dhl93449,
In a word... No.  One must remember that no tape can sound 'better' than the machine it was created on (assuming all is functioning as it should).  Any idea how many IC opamps were in the recording chain at the studio?  Me neither, but we can safely assume that in most instances there were plenty and yet  many treasured recordings were made using them. 
For example, I smile a little at those that spend $$$$$ on cables.  Yes they can make a difference, but to me it seems that most use them as tone controls.. And yet they never consider the miles and miles  of 'run of the mill'  patch cords and cables that are in 90% of todays recording studios. (yesterdays too) 

I have an extensive tape collection, and several reel to reel masters that were made in the late 50's (purchased from a local studio)  They sound wonderful.  I don't have any special storage system other than the box they came in.
The condition of the tape seems to depend a lot on the quality of its manufacturing, and we all know there was a ton of crummy tapes made over the years but studios usually stayed away from lesser brands.  Sould I find that one of them is drying out, I can always dub it onto a new tape and still have an excellent sounding master copy good for another 50 years.

Most all of our treasured LP's are derived from tape, and like photographic film you can still make an excellent print today from a decades old negative.. Just saying.  Tape is an excellent archival medium. 

With regard to prosummer machines, I would happily pit my Pioneer, ReVox, Crown and Sony playing a 15ips master copy against any digital source.  To me it just sounds better and for me that's what's most important.
N.

I have a load of vintage (late 50's) Capitol 1/2 track reel to reels at 7.5 ips that blow away everyone who listens to them, including tape collectors. They were made in real time, on good tape, and they still work perfectly.

In the end, nothing sounds like RTR, it is better than vinyl and much better than digital , it deserves a comeback.

HW